Search form

Christian Zionism is an umbrella term under which many Christians who support Israel have congregated. However, although there is broad agreement among those who acknowledge God’s prophetic purposes for Israel, and who point to 1948 as the fulfilment of prophecy, there is considerable disagreement relating to the interpretation of those scriptures that speak of the Rapture of the church, the identity and role of the Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, and the Second Coming. I believe that Christian Zionism, properly defined, incorporates the following key elements:

In presenting this working definition, I have no wish to alienate any Christian friend of Israel. However, such a definition is necessary in order to dispel confusion, correct misunderstanding, and provide a sound, biblical foundation on which to base that “friendship” and support. Consequently, I will, on occasion, quote from those who would not subscribe to my definition, but whose contributions I consider to be of value.

The Zionist Badge

According to Edward Flannery, without Christian Zionism “it is highly unlikely that the present State of Israel would have come into being so rapidly as it did.” The Encyclopaedia of Zionism and Israel also credits Christian Zionism with having had “a direct bearing” on the Zionist movement, while Lawrence Epstein suggests that too few people realise “how much Christians have contributed to the Zionist movement and to the nation of Israel.”

Many Christians have chosen to wear the Zionist badge as a mark of solidarity with the Jewish people and the Jewish State, and as a way of distancing themselves from those within the church who have replaced Israel theologically and opposed her politically. In his book, Standing with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State (2006), Jewish writer David Brog describes Christian Zionists as “the ideological heirs of the righteous Gentiles who saved Jews during the Holocaust,” and those who today are “putting on the yellow star.”

The term favoured by historians when surveying Christian interest in the return of the Jews to the Land has been “Restorationism,” but this label is too broad and all encompassing and fails to account for theological intricacies. Since Christian Zionism is fundamentally eschatological, any survey that fails to get to grips with this theological vocabulary will be flawed. Although it is not easy to distinguish between the eschatological constellations that at first glance appear identical, care must be taken so that a correct identification of “Christian Zionism” can be made.

The Fundamentals of Christian Zionism

The Christian Zionist badge has been indiscriminately pinned on members of the professing church. This is particularly evident among liberal Protestants who have expressed solidarity with the Jewish State, either on humanitarian grounds, or to atone for crimes committed against the Jewish people in the name of Christianity, or simply as a means of upholding biblical concepts of liberation and social justice. However, the history of this liberal movement is relatively recent compared to its fundamentally biblical, evangelical, and eschatologically driven counterpart, and its impact marginal by comparison. One only has to consider the success of Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth, which sold 28 million copies during the 1970s, and the remarkable phenomenon of the Left Behind series of Rapture novels, which have frequently topped best-seller lists and “blown the lid off previous publishing records,” to appreciate the scale of a Christian Zionist tradition concerned, first and foremost, with pursuing a biblical “Road-map to peace.” Liberal Protestant theologians and sympathisers of Zionism, such as Paul Tillich and Reinhold Niebuhr, may have hung their solidarity on scriptures concerned with social justice and liberation, but Christian Zionism as outlined in this book begins and ends with the Bible, and, more specifically, with a consistently literal interpretation of biblical prophecy. As Elishua Davidson summarises, “the whole prophetic biblical word is a blueprint for the future of Israel, the nations, and the world.” Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons), the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and particularly the Christadelphians have often been included in historical surveys of Restorationism and Christian Zionism, but this simply muddies the waters. Owing to their heterodoxy, these movements must be treated separately and their theology distinguished from that which is fundamentally Protestant and evangelical.

As the Encyclopaedia of Zionism and Israel has rightly stated, Christian Zionism is “a purely Christian affair” whose goals have “remained theological.” Far from being a contradiction in terms, it is the most appropriate label for distinguishing a fundamentally biblical, evangelical, and eschatological interest in Israel’s restoration from other expressions of pro-Israel sentiment.

Christian Zionists make a clear distinction between Israel and the church, insisting that the church is neither the “New,” “true,” nor “spiritual Israel.” According to Lewis Sperry Chafer, founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, “Israel has never been the Church, is not the Church now, nor will she ever be the Church.” According to Ramon Bennett, “When we speak of Israel’s God, or the God of Israel, we speak of the God of the physical nation of Israel—the Jewish people, not the Church. Israel is not a synonym for the Church.” Rob Richards, former UK director of the Church’s Ministry among Jewish People (CMJ), is even more succinct: “Israel is Israel is Israel.”

Christian Zionists believe that God is working out uniquely separate, albeit interrelated, purposes with Israel and the church. This distinction is rooted in the Abrahamic Covenant, which has been described as “the basis of the entire covenant program,” “the fountainhead of Bible prophecy,” and “absolutely pivotal in the entire structure of prophetic truth.” Thus although the church is comprised of “Abraham’s seed” (Galatians:3:29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.See All...), it does not fulfil “the yet unfulfilled provisions of that covenant” that pertain to the nation of Israel, and which the prophets spoke so much about. Consequently, Paul’s statement that “all Israel will be saved” (Romans:11:26And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:See All...), described by Skevington Wood as “a crux exegetica in prophetic interpretation,” speaks not only of the salvation of individual Jews prior to Christ’s Second Coming but also of the future, nationalsalvation of Israel when He returns to reign in Jerusalem. Israel thus exists as a nation outside the church, “with all of God’s promises and plans for her remaining in full force.” Christian Zionists make a further important distinction by insisting that the salvation of both the nation and the individual is mediated through the New Covenant in Christ. As Steve Maltz writes, “There’s no fast track to paradise for the chosen people,” since “Jews are not saved through Judaism, but through Jesus, like everyone else.”

The church has consistently spiritualised Israel’s blessings while interpreting her judgments literally. Basilea Schlink considers the transfer of one without the other to be “untruthful and impossible.” To paraphrase Michael Brown, one could no more convince the Jews in exile that God’s promise of restoration was figurative than one could convince them that their captivity was to be understood figuratively also. Consistency in interpretation demands that the “literality of the promised restoration would have to be just as real as the literality of the threatened judgment.” As the Lord Himself declared, “Just as I have brought all this great calamity on this people, so I will bring on them all the good that I have promised them” (Jeremiah:32:42For thus saith the LORD; Like as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have promised them.See All...).

Despite centuries of Diaspora wandering, the Jewish people have maintained a “Holy Land-centred faith,” their hearts longing for the promised return to Zion. Christian Zionists insist that the Land of Israel, the Jewish people, and the city of Jerusalem are “inextricably bonded together in a covenant relationship.” As Moishe Rosen points out, “God promised Abraham more than a nation of descendants. He promised a land.” This interrelationship between the people and the Land is said to be “the key which unlocks many prophetic secrets.” Johann Kurtz, in his History of the Old Covenant (1859), expressed it this way: “As the body is adapted and destined for the soul, and the soul for the body; so is Israel for that country and that country for Israel.”

Although many Jews have now returned to the Land, and the State of Israel has been re-established, Christian Zionists insist that Israel’s present territory is only a fraction of what was promised to Abraham (Genesis:15:18In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:See All...) and confirmed to Moses and Joshua (Numbers:34:3-12[3] Then your south quarter shall be from the wilderness of Zin along by the coast of Edom, and your south border shall be the outmost coast of the salt sea eastward:
[4] And your border shall turn from the south to the ascent of Akrabbim, and pass on to Zin: and the going forth thereof shall be from the south to Kadeshbarnea, and shall go on to Hazaraddar, and pass on to Azmon:
[5] And the border shall fetch a compass from Azmon unto the river of Egypt, and the goings out of it shall be at the sea.
[6] And as for the western border, ye shall even have the great sea for a border: this shall be your west border.
[7] And this shall be your north border: from the great sea ye shall point out for you mount Hor:
[8] From mount Hor ye shall point out your border unto the entrance of Hamath; and the goings forth of the border shall be to Zedad:
[9] And the border shall go on to Ziphron, and the goings out of it shall be at Hazarenan: this shall be your north border.
[10] And ye shall point out your east border from Hazarenan to Shepham:
[11] And the coast shall go down from Shepham to Riblah, on the east side of Ain; and the border shall descend, and shall reach unto the side of the sea of Chinnereth eastward:
[12] And the border shall go down to Jordan, and the goings out of it shall be at the salt sea: this shall be your land with the coasts thereof round about.
See All...; Joshua:1:4From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast.See All...). As Carment Urquhart wrote in 1945, “Palestine will never belong, by any real right of possession, to any people but the Jews…. When the Jews repent and accept the Lord Jesus they will be given not only Palestine but also all the rest of the great Land of Promise, and will be a blessing in the midst of the whole earth.” So central is the Land to their theology that Christian Zionists have described it as “the most important piece of real estate on earth,” “God’s geographical centre,” “the geographical platform on which the story of the Bible is staged,” “the focal point of the universe—for the outworking of the purposes of God,” “the centre of Divine dealings with nations,” “the spiritual navel of the world,” “the epicenter of human history,” and “ground zero for the end times.” In a similar vein, Jerusalem has been depicted as “a miraculous entity,” the only city on earth “not up for negotiation with anyone at any time for any reason,” and “ground zero for the future activities of the Antichrist” and for “God’s gracious redemption.” In his address to the Israeli Knesset on 5 December 1949, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion declared that “Jewish Jerusalem is an organic and inseparable part of the State of Israel, as it is an inseparable part of the history and religion of Israel and of the soul of our people.” Christian Zionists agree, although they assert that Jerusalem’s importance rests ultimately in the fact that it is “the city where God’s Son died for the sins of the world.” It therefore follows eschatologically that the Second Coming of Christ cannot be divorced from the place to which He will return, nor from the people to whom He will return. As Sydney Watson writes, “the Jewish question is infinitely more closely enwrapped with the fact of our Lord’s near return, than many speakers and writers give prominence to.”

The Abrahamic Covenant

Christian Zionists cite the Abrahamic Covenant as the basis of Israel’s right to possess the Land, claiming that God’s promises to Abraham were “quite specific and unambiguous,” having been sealed by an unconditional and everlasting covenant (Genesis:12:1-7[1] Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
[2] And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
[3] And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
[4] So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
[5] And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.
[6] And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land.
[7] And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.
See All...; 15:18-21; 17:6-8; 26:3; 28:13-15; Hebrews:6:13-17[13] For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,
[14] Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.
[15] And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise.
[16] For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.
[17] Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:
See All...). Murray Dixon notes that “God was the sole signatory” to this covenant, since only He passed through the animal pieces (Genesis:15:12-21[12] And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.
[13] And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
[14] And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.
[15] And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.
[16] But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
[17] And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces.
[18] In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
[19] The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
[20] And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
[21] And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
See All...). The inference drawn from Ancient Near Eastern custom is that in so doing, God invoked a curse upon Himself, should He ever break His promise. Tatford adds that “No provision was made for its revocation, and it was not subject to amendment or annulment.” Christian Zionists insist that this unconditional covenant, unlike the “conditional contract” of Sinai, has not been abrogated or superseded by the New Covenant. Whereas occupation of the Land was conditional upon obedience to the law of Moses, ownership was eternally guaranteed on the basis of God’s unilateral oath. Therefore despite periods of protracted exile, the relationship between the Jewish people and the Land was only “interrupted” and not “severed,” the return from exile being dependent entirely on God’s faithfulness to His covenant with Abraham. As the psalmist declared, God “remembers His covenant for ever, the word He commanded, for a thousand generations, the covenant He made with Abraham, the oath He swore to Isaac” (Psalm:105:8-9[8] He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations.
[9] Which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac;
See All...; cf. Luke:1:54-55[54] He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;
[55] As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.
See All..., 68-73). Paul confirms this in his letter to the Galatians when he writes:

…the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise. (Galatians:3:17-18[17] And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
[18] For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
See All...)

Although Christian Zionists cast those who deny Israel’s future restoration in the role of the “stay-at-home son” (Luke:15:11-32[11] And he said, A certain man had two sons:
[12] And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living.
[13] And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living.
[14] And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want.
[15] And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.
[16] And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him.
[17] And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger!
[18] I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee,
[19] And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.
[20] And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.
[21] And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son.
[22] But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet:
[23] And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry:
[24] For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.
[25] Now his elder son was in the field: and as he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard musick and dancing.
[26] And he called one of the servants, and asked what these things meant.
[27] And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound.
[28] And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out, and intreated him.
[29] And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:
[30] But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.
[31] And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
[32] It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.
See All...), they insist that it is not on the basis of merit that God is restoring Israel “but because He is a covenant-keeping Sovereign who has regard for His own reputation.” In the words of Dave Hunt, “God’s integrity is tied to Israel.” This inextricable link between the honour of God’s Name and the restoration of the Jews to the Land is highlighted in the following biblical prophecy:

Therefore say to the house of Israel, “Thus says the Lord GOD: I do not do this for your sake, O house of Israel, but for My holy name’s sake, which you have profaned among the nations wherever you went. And I will sanctify My great name, which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst; and the nations shall know that I am the LORD,” says the Lord GOD, “when I am hallowed in you before their eyes.” (Ezekiel:36:22-23[22] Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.
[23] And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.
See All...)

If, as supersessionists believe, the Abrahamic Covenant was conditional, then, according to George Peters, “everything else is conditional; then the foundations of Christian hope crumble away beneath us, and nothing stable remains.” In other words, if Israel has been rejected by God and replaced by the church because of her failures, “can it not be equally argued that the Church has miserably failed God also?”

The Berean Call is available by postal mail each month for free. We are willing to send the newsletter to you by regular mail but encourage you to read it online to save printing and mailing costs. Send us a message to add or change your paper mail address.

The Berean Call is also available in a large-print edition at a nominal cost.

If you are outside the U.S. The Berean Call is available by paid subscription .